B
Benadam
Guest
Thank you. Very helpful to me.
I was appealing to something I remembered St Augustine wrote in defense against Faustus and something I’ve stuck to since.
- Status
I was appealing to something I remembered St Augustine wrote in defense against Faustus and something I’ve stuck to since.
B
Benadam
Guest
Thank you. I do accept them in the good spirit you offer. Very helpful too.
I was appealing to St Augustine’s position in his defense against Faustus.
B
Benadam
Guest
Contra Faustum, Book XXIII
paragraph 9.We believe that Mary, as well as Joseph, was of the family of David, because we believe the Scriptures, which assert both that Christ was of the seed of David after the flesh, and that His mother was the Virgin Mary, He having no human father.
But even were I to admit this account, I should still contend that Joachim must have in some way belonged to the family of David, and had somehow been adopted from the tribe of Judah into that of Levi; or if not he, one of his ancestors; or, at least, that while born in the tribe of Levi, he had still some relation to the line of David; as Faustus himself acknowledges that Mary, though belonging to the tribe of Levi, could be given to a husband of the tribe of Judah; and he expressly says that if Mary were Joseph’s daughter, the name Son of David would be applicable to Christ. In this way, by the marriage of Joseph’s daughter in the tribe of Levi, her son, though born in the tribe of Levi, might not improperly be called the Son of David. And so, if the mother of that Joachim, who in the passage quoted by Faustus is called the father of Mary, married in the tribe of Levi while she belonged to the tribe of Judah and to the family of David, there would thus be a sufficient reason for speaking of Joachim and Mary and Mary’s son as belonging to the seed of David.
(the underlined is not to emphasize but to designate hyperlinks available in the Catholic encyclopedia from which I copied this material.)
paragraph 9.We believe that Mary, as well as Joseph, was of the family of David, because we believe the Scriptures, which assert both that Christ was of the seed of David after the flesh, and that His mother was the Virgin Mary, He having no human father.
- Faustus cannot pretend then I am unable to prove that Mary was of the family of David, as I have shown him unable to prove that she was not. I produce the strongest evidence from Scriptures of established authority, which declare that Christ was of the seed of David, and that He was born without a father of the Virgin Mary.
But even were I to admit this account, I should still contend that Joachim must have in some way belonged to the family of David, and had somehow been adopted from the tribe of Judah into that of Levi; or if not he, one of his ancestors; or, at least, that while born in the tribe of Levi, he had still some relation to the line of David; as Faustus himself acknowledges that Mary, though belonging to the tribe of Levi, could be given to a husband of the tribe of Judah; and he expressly says that if Mary were Joseph’s daughter, the name Son of David would be applicable to Christ. In this way, by the marriage of Joseph’s daughter in the tribe of Levi, her son, though born in the tribe of Levi, might not improperly be called the Son of David. And so, if the mother of that Joachim, who in the passage quoted by Faustus is called the father of Mary, married in the tribe of Levi while she belonged to the tribe of Judah and to the family of David, there would thus be a sufficient reason for speaking of Joachim and Mary and Mary’s son as belonging to the seed of David.
(the underlined is not to emphasize but to designate hyperlinks available in the Catholic encyclopedia from which I copied this material.)
B
Benadam
Guest
B
Ben_Masada
Guest
Because the NT is right for a change. Joseph was indeed Jesus’ father, and I mean biologically. Otherwise, it would have been a scandal in Israel. Joseph was the one from the Tribe of Judah. Since the genealogic trait cannot be transmitted through the mother or through adoption, according to Jewish Law, if we deny Jesus his afilliation to Joseph, he could never be looked at as the Messiah, although, that is not the only qualification.
Ben:
B
Benadam
Guest
Ben, if you allow for argument sake that the Incarnation is true and presented peculiar circumstances that weren’t exactly open for observation, you would have to admit that the road to scandal was to tell the truth publicly which of course would just lead to a double dose of scandal that Joseph was a nut or his wife bore the child of another man.
Because the NT is right for a change. Joseph was indeed Jesus’ father, and I mean biologically. Otherwise, it would have been a scandal in Israel. Joseph was the one from the Tribe of Judah. Since the genealogic trait cannot be transmitted through the mother or through adoption, according to Jewish Law, if we deny Jesus his afilliation to Joseph, he could never be looked at as the Messiah, although, that is not the only qualification.
Ben:
Either way, a biological father would not have to say anything about a virgin birth nor would the loving husband of a wife who experienced a miraculous pregnancy.
B
Ben_Masada
Guest
Benadam, has it occurred to you that Jesus was Jewish? For Heaven’s sake we are talking about Judaism. What you suggest is possible only in Greek Mythology. If Jesus had been a Greek man, we would not be discussing this issue. But man, there is no such a thing in Judaism!
Ben:
S
Shlomey
Guest
The issue is still the bloodline, I found this rather interesting post:
also:
Apocalypse of John (Revelation) 22:16 I Jesus have sent my angel, to testify to you these things in the churches. I am the root and stock of David, the bright and morning star.
also:
Apocalypse of John (Revelation) 22:16 I Jesus have sent my angel, to testify to you these things in the churches. I am the root and stock of David, the bright and morning star.
B
Benadam
Guest
This has been an enlightening thread for me especially with your contribution to it.
Benadam, has it occurred to you that Jesus was Jewish? For Heaven’s sake we are talking about Judaism. What you suggest is possible only in Greek Mythology. If Jesus had been a Greek man, we would not be discussing this issue. But man, there is no such a thing in Judaism!
Ben:
I understand that your view is not an invalid enterpretation of scriptures since seeing Jesus as it’s fulfillment was not reasonably possible before the Christ Event. Excepting of course Simeon and Anna mentioned in the Gospel.
I’ve come to the same conclusion as the poster shlomey quoted above.
At the risk of being a bit off topic I disagree that the Incarnation is possible in Greek mythology. Events grounded in history are outside the pail of Greek myth not to mention something like a virgin birth being possible at all has to be dismissed. It’s definitely assumed to be a supernatural phenomenon.
I think it is more fitting in the Jewish context unless one can imagine a more fitting way to make the following scriptures realized.
Isaias 42
6 I the Lord have called thee in justice, and taken thee by the hand, and preserved thee. And I have given thee for a covenant of the people, for a light of the Gentiles:
2 Isaias 49
6 And he said: It is a small thing that thou shouldst be my servant to raise up the tribes of Jacob, and to convert the dregs of Israel. Behold, I have given thee to be the light of the Gentiles, that thou mayst be my salvation even to the farthest part of the earth.
3 Isaias 60
3 And the Gentiles shall walk in thy light, and kings in the brightness of thy rising.
Perhaps Pagan myth found it’s true object in the meaning we christians attach to Judaism.
Myth points but through the People of God Truth happened is happening and will happen.
- Status